oldnslow Member 74 posts Joined Jul 2006 More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:22 | #1 Since alot of my shooting is between f 4 and f8 (for depth of field) I was wondering if the f4 IS, being the newer design is sharper at these f stops than the f2.8 IS mk1. Bodies: Canon 1DMKIII Nikon D3/D300
LOG IN TO REPLY |
crn3371 Cream of the Crop  7,198 posts Likes: 2 Joined Mar 2005 Location: SoCal, USA More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:34 | #2 Frankly, I think all of the Canon 70-200's are sharp. If I was shopping for one I'd be basing my decision on price, whether I needed f2.8 rather than f4, and whether I needed stabilization. Sharpness wouldn't be part of my decision making process.
LOG IN TO REPLY |
twoshadows Liquid Nitrogen  7,340 posts Gallery: 51 photos Best ofs: 19 Likes: 4894 Joined Jul 2007 Location: Between the palms and the pines. More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:37 | #3 crn3371 wrote in post #11169984  Frankly, I think all of the Canon 70-200's are sharp. If I was shopping for one I'd be basing my decision on price, whether I needed f2.8 rather than f4, and whether I needed stabilization. Sharpness wouldn't be part of my decision making process. +1 xgender.net
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Oct 26, 2010 16:40 | #4 The f4 IS is definitely sharper but it cant do 2.8. For me, I didnt want the weight or need the speed of 2.8 and thats why I got the f4 IS when I was in the market. If you do, dont let this hold you back from getting the 2.8 - no sense not getting a lens that is useful to you just because some dumb test charts say another one is a bit sharper... Lake Superior and North Shore Landscape Photography
LOG IN TO REPLY |
Combatmedic870 Goldmember  1,739 posts Joined Oct 2009 Location: Salem ,OR More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:43 | #5 Yes it is sharper. Nikon D700: 16-35 F4, 50 1.4G, 85 1.8,105 VR Micro, 135F2 DC, 80-200 2.8 AFS
LOG IN TO REPLY |
x_tan Cream of the Crop  More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:56 | #6 Bob Atkins has a list for 'The BEST Canon EOS Lenses' Canon 5D3 + Zoom (EF 17-40L, 24-105L & 28-300L, 100-400L II) & Prime (24L II, 85L II, 100L, 135L & 200 f/2.8L II; Zeiss 1,4/35)
LOG IN TO REPLY |
themadman Cream of the Crop  18,871 posts Likes: 14 Joined Nov 2009 Location: Northern California More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:58 | #7 One word, Yes. Will | WilliamLiuPhotography.com
LOG IN TO REPLY |
biggusdickus Member 38 posts Joined Feb 2010 More info | Oct 26, 2010 16:59 | #8 From a sharpness perspective the f/4L IS is nearly indistinguishable from the 2.8 Mk II, so yes it is sharper than the Mk I. It does suffer from a little more falloff than the Mk II
LOG IN TO REPLY |
stevefossimages Goldmember  1,646 posts Joined Jan 2006 Location: Ely, Minnesota More info | Oct 26, 2010 17:21 | #9 MNUplander wrote in post #11170041 The f4 IS is definitely sharper but it cant do 2.8. For me, I didnt want the weight or need the speed of 2.8 and thats why I got the f4 IS when I was in the market. If you do, dont let this hold you back from getting the 2.8 - no sense not getting a lens that is useful to you just because some dumb test charts say another one is a bit sharper... Agree completely. Steve Foss
LOG IN TO REPLY |
ni$mo350 Cream of the Crop  6,011 posts Likes: 14 Joined Apr 2009 Location: Portland, OR More info | Oct 26, 2010 17:38 | #10 |
CheshireCat Goldmember  2,303 posts Likes: 407 Joined Oct 2008 Location: *** vanished *** More info | Oct 26, 2010 17:47 | #11 Hope this helps: 1Dx, 5D2 and some lenses
LOG IN TO REPLY |
 | x 1600 |
| y 1600 |
| Log in Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!
|
| ||
| Latest registered member is SierraLima 367 guests, 154 members online Simultaneous users record so far is 15,144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018 | |||
